I find it very, very doubtful this game "easily outshines The Resistance." If it even comes close to the same level of experience I'll be highly impressed.
That said, I won't dismiss it because of the art, but I will happily throw my two cents in here to criticize FFG for their AWFUL choice in art design. It simply looks hideous, and it's going to make it that much harder to get to the table. Vampires already have a certain stigma, and going the teeny-bopper goth look with really cheesy photograph pictures just makes it that much worse. I don't want a game that I have to excuse how stupid it looks every time I want to get people to try it, and for FFG's sake, I don't think it's going to help impulse buyers taking it off the shelf.
As a final thought, is it too much to ask that players who like the mechanics of the game also get to enjoy the aesthetics of the components? AEG is learning their lesson by reprinting Love Letter with the original artwork instead of the ugly mess they turned it into. Maybe it's not too much to hope for that FFG could do the same on a second print run? I'd probably buy it twice if they did (if it's as good as it looks to be).

I disagree with several of the claims here. You do not need 3x of every card to be competitive as suggested by many. Many of the 1x or 2x copies of cards in the Core set are those that you likely shouldn't be playing 3-of anyway. I believe the real reason to own multiple Core sets is for players who want to have multiple Corp and Runner decks built at the same time. Indeed, I do not miss having a third copy of the 1x or 2x cards nearly as much as I miss having 6x of great staple cards.
Someone said that one Core set doesn't contain enough cards to make multiple Corp decks and scarcely enough to make multiple runner decks. I find the opposite to be true. The Core set comes with more Corp cards, and Corps do not seem nearly as reliant on neutral faction cards. With one Core set I have a very solid Jinteki Corp deck as well as an HBN Corp deck that I'm very proud of. I have a decent Criminal Runner deck, and for the life of me I cannot create another Runner deck of any worth with the remaining cards (and this is WITH the first 3 data packs). I really feel like I need another Core set, not to be competitive, but so that I can have more decks (ideally would like to have one of each faction).
To sum up, one Core is definitely enough to play the game enjoyably with two players. Ideally, as a customizable card game, I'd recommend each player to have their own cards, but it's not necessary. Getting extra Core sets is a luxury that can help you get more out of your game. That's all.

gdotbat said:
The reality is, FFG could afford to take the risk when trying the LCG model. If it failed, they would lose money sure, but not enough to put them out of business by any means.
I don't think this is correct. My understanding is that FFG didn't take any risk. They had two CCGs at the time, Game of Thrones and Call of Cthulhu. Both were failing miserably despite devoted fans. They didn't so much take a risk developing a new game with a new distribution model as they came up with a model to save a dying game. That model worked and then they started releasing new games directly to that model.
I think LCG's are the way of the future for collectible card gaming just as Free To Play has become the way of the future for MMORPG's. While the kings of those game types (Magic and World of Warcraft) will likely stay the way they are for a good while longer, the competition is learning that adopting new, less greedy business models can allow them to still be successful. I think the key is getting the playerbase to realize that they can play a top grade customizable card game without having to pay hundreds of dollars every few months on new cards. I'm hoping Netrunner (which is one of the best CCGs ever made) brings more attention to LCGs from dedicated CCG players.

Richard Garfield created several amazing collectible card games. Jyhad (later renamed Vampire: The Eternal Struggle for reasons I'm not fond of) is easily one of his best. I think it would make a great LCG, especially if they tightened up some of the balancing issues the game had such as the overpowered rares and no card limits. On that note, all of Garfield's CCGs would make great LCGs.
The real problem would be the reason the game failed originally. As great as it is, the game really only shines with 5+ players. You can have fun with it with 3-4, but it's not the same. Forget about playing 2 player. The other issue is that the theme was niche back in it's day. Today one might call it unpopular. Combine an unpopular theme with the necessity of quite a few players don't lend to a game being successful.
I would like to see Fantasy Flight only make the game if it was right for them. It would be nice to see new life breathed into the game encouraging new players to try out this under appreciated classic. As of now, FFG has six LCG's, and I'd hate to see the support for those watered down in order to support a game that might not have enough demand for it (no matter how great it is). Perhaps in the future the gaming climate will change.